tomorrow night, i'll talk to senator john mccain with his battle with president obama over benghazi. that's all for us. "ac 360" starts now. we begin as we do keeping them honest looking for facts not offering opinions or playing favorites. we're not supporting democrats or republicans. you can find that on plenty of other cable channels. our goal reporting, finding the facts. tonight our focus, it's over the attacks in benghazi. today, mr. mccain took it a step further enand said because of susan rice's role, the confusing

fact, we'll talk to senator mccain in a second so president obama took the opportunity to fire back directly at the senator. >> if senator mccain and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. and i'm happy to have that discussion with them. but for them to go after the u.n. ambassador, who had nothing to do with benghazi and was simply making a presentation based on intelligence that she had received and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous. >> well, senator mccain heard that remark. 73 minutes later took to the floor of the u.s. senate to respond. >> mr. president, four brave

americans died. it has now been eight weeks and the american people have received nothing but contradictory statements from all levels of our government. this president and this administration has either been guilty of colossal incompetence, or engaged in a cover-up, neither of which are acceptable to the american people. >> keeping then honest, more than two months after the deadly attack on the u.s. consulate in benghazi, there are still some serious questions about the timeline of the events and specifically the administration's response in the days and weeks that followed. specifically, why didn't the president call it an act of terrorism? the president said, "it was quote too early to know exactly how this came about. or during an appearance on "the view" on the 25th. when asked, the president said "they were doing an investigation." or even more to the point, how the president described it five days after the attacks. >> putting together the best

information that we have available to us today, our current assessment is that what happened in benghazi was in fact initially a spontaneous reaction to what had just transpired hours before in cairo. almost a copycat of the demonstrations against our facility in cairo, which were prompted, of course, by the video. >> ambassador rice blaming the killings on that hateful anti-muslim video. that turned out to be wrong. some question senator mccain is asking that he might get answers to this. as for holding up ms. rice's potential nomination as secretary of state over this, well, keep in mind, some key people in washington have trip tripped up on false intelligence in the past. people like condoleeza rice. who as national security adviser back in 2003, made the case for war in iraq, insisting that saddam hussein had weapons of mass destruction. >> it is time to stop the deceit

and time to stop trying to deceive the world, and to offer up his weapons of mass destruction so that he can be disarmed. the overwhelming bulk of the evidence there, not about a data point here or a data point there, but about what saddam hussein was doing, was that he had weapons of mass destruction. >> right up to the end, saddam hussein continued to harbor ambitions to threaten the world with weapons of mass destruction and to hide illegal weapons activities. >> now, no nuclear weapons, no wmd ever turned up in iraq, of course. condoleezza rice went on to become secretary of state in the bush administration and back then, senator mccain and other republicans had no problem supporting her, in spite of the fact she fell for bad intelligence. >> condoleezza rice is a great american success story. this is what america is all about. a young woman who grew up in a segregated part of america, where americans were not treated equally, to rise to the position of secretary of state. we should have been celebrating i believe this remarkable

american success story. also, i thought that some of the remarks, and i'm not going to mention my colleague's names, i thought some of the remarks aimed at her during her hearings challenged her integrity. we can disagree on policy and we can disagree on a lot of things, but i think it's very clear condoleezza rice is a person of integrity, and, yes, i see this, some lingering bitterness over a very tough campaign. i hope it dissipates soon. >> senator john mccain joins me now. senator, you said today that you plan to do everything in your power to block susan rice's nomination to be secretary of state if president obama nominates her. her supporters say she was simply repeating the earlier assessment that she had been given by the intelligence community about the benghazi attack. a spokesman, as you know, for

the national defense confirmed in late september that we disseminated the information, and it was only later the intelligence assessment changed. do you not believe the dni? >> well, first of all, talking points came from the white house, not from the dni. but, second of all, it was obvious within 24 hours that the station chief from the cia had said this was a terrorist attack. it was obvious to one and all that this was not a "spontaneous demonstration" because in realtime, they saw there was no demonstration. the -- ms. rice, i hope saw or ambassador rice i hope saw when i was on "face the nation" that immediately after she spoke, the head of the libyan national assembly, the president of it, said that this was an al qaeda attack, and she continued to tell all of the world through all of the talk shows that it was a, quote, spontaneous demonstration sparked by a video. that is not competence in my view.

and i think that she should have known and she has never to this point declared that she was wrong. and the president is the one who is ultimately responsible, but that is not an acceptable person in my view to be secretary of state. >> but the dni seemed to be backing her up, saying we disseminated the intelligence to the executive branch, to members of congress. i mean do you think they are falling on their swords? do you think they didn't do that? possible they were just wrong and gave out the early assessment and faulty intelligence? >> the dni is saying one thing. the state department -- or the other -- the cia station chief within 24 hours said it was an al qaeda affiliated attack. didn't she have this information? the white house gave the talking points. the president, incredibly, over two weeks later continued

to call this a spontaneous demonstration that sparked this attack, which by then he must have known was totally false. he said that to the united nations. there's a lot of things wrong here and she is part of it, and she gave deceptive information to the american people when there was clearly counterinformation that affirmed that this was a terrorist attack, orchestrated by an al qaeda affiliated organization. >> supporters of ambassador rice compare her comments made to comments that condoleezza rice made back when she was national security adviser in 2002 when she made a very public case for the iraq war saying that saddam hussein was pursuing nuclear weapons, weapons of mass destruction, and that intelligence was incorrect. when she was nominated for secretary of state, many republicans spoke out strongly for her, saying she was a success story, anyone who would challenge her integrity is based on politics. they say there is a double standard. to that, you say what?

>> i appreciate them saying that, but the fact is, four americans died. four americans died and there was overwhelming evidence to the contrary that this was a clearly -- clearly an al qaeda affiliated attack that murdered four americans that didn't need to happen. there were advanced warnings on august 15th and 16th. they said that it would -- it was a case of concerted attack, they could not guarantee that they could defend the consulate. there was many warnings, there were previous attacks -- all of that goes to the state department and to this administration and our ambassador to the u.n. it raises a question, what was she doing out there anyway? and so she -- the american people were told -- given false information when there was clearly information to counter that immediately. people don't go to spontaneous demonstrations with mortars and rocket-propelled grenades. >> i just want to push back a little bit on the condoleezza rice comments. >> sure. sure.

>> because thousands were killed in the war in iraq and yet people did not -- republicans did not hold her accountable for misleading statements she made in the run-up to the war when she was being nominated for secretary of state. >> uh-huh. and i respect that opinion and that view. i think these are two entirely different cases, but if somebody wants to make that case and tell the american people that it was okay to go out and tell them that this was a spontaneous demonstration sparked by a hateful video, that they are qualified to be our secretary of state, then they are entitled to that view. i'm entitled to my role of that as advise and consent in the united states senate, and my advise and consent and my constitutional obligation is that i will not vote and not agree to her appointment as secretary of state. >> senator mccain, i appreciate your time, sir. thank you. >> thank you for having me on. >> all right, digging deeper, let's bring in senior congressional correspondent

dana bash, gloria borgen, and david gergen. dana, you have covered senator mccain for years and covered the presidential campaign in 2008 against president obama and what do you make of this? is there something personal or political going on perhaps? >> i have been half joking all day, that to borrow a phrase from the president, 2008 is calling and it wants its presidential campaign back. because you can see and hear both -- in both men's expressions and in the tones of their voices that there is a lot going on there beneath the surface between the two that's probably not resolved from their battle of four years ago. so in that case it is personal and political. but i think it's personal for john mccain in another way, to be fair, because he knew ambassador stevens quite well and he had just been visiting with him, and he feels this need to avenge his death and make it right. he is on a mission that is definitely personal, but it is also political in another way in that you heard from the republicans during the presidential campaign, this one,

that they were frustrated that mitt romney didn't talk about this enough, because they felt that it was a way to get at president obama's leadership and i talked to the republicans who admit that they were trying to make it an issue now. >> gloria, you say you saw a different president obama particularly with rice. >> yeah, he really pushed back on john mccain and lindsey graham and called it outrageous that they would make these charges about her, that she knowingly disseminated false information. he said look, if you have a problem, take it up with me. and i think in his own way, he was very testy today, and in his own way, what he was doing was he was saying to john mccain, you want to make this an issue, buddy? dare me to nominate her. it really sounded like in reading between the lines that this is something he's interested in doing. this is a political fight that's not going to go away.

one thing that struck me is that the president talked about going after her, because she's "an easy target." well, what does that mean? is it because she's a woman? is it because she was the only one out there using the information that she had? a i mean, it's interesting to me. i'm not quite sure what the president was talking about. >> you know, david, so many questions about the attacks in benghazi, and it is surprising that they are going after ambassador rice and not secretary clinton? >> no, i'm not surprised, and i do think that underneath all of this, there is not as much confidence with susan rice as with republicans. they favor john kerry as the next secretary of state. they work well with him, and they think he has the requisite experience. i don't think that it has to do with her womanhood, but goes down to the confidence question. this is shaping up as a very nasty fight. it could get quite personal.

it could go mano-o-mano. it is very personal. we are trying to create a sense of bipartisanship to get this calmed down. what the president needs to do, i think, is to have some quiet emissaries up on capitol hill to see if he has the votes to beat a filibuster, and i think she would have to do some private rounds that will help a lot in defusing this. >> a lot of talk about the impending fiscal cliff. congressional leaders headed to the white house for the high-level talks on this. did you hear anything that sounded like a compromise? >> no, not today. and this is not to say we won't. but, look, this is a president that clearly feels that he's got a lot of leverage now. and while i --i heard that in the president today and what he was doing was essentially, and dana can talk more about this

than i can, calling the republican bluff and saying that one thing we all agree on is extending the tax cuts for the middle class, so let's do that first. republicans believe if they do that, they would lose their leverage, but the president was basically saying, okay, guys. let's do this, and then we'll move on to the second step of the process. but i do agree with david, and by the way, i'm not saying they are picking on susan rice because she's a woman, but i do this it's an interesting turn of phrase by the president "easy target," but these things are heating up so quickly that they better not get backed up into corners they cannot get out of. >> dana, what do we expect from the meeting on friday? >> the truth of the matter is, they have to have this meeting, and they have to sit down eyeball to eyeball and discuss things where the cameras aren't there. however, we know from history, particularly recent history with this president and these congressional leaders that most of the real work is going to get done on the phone with -- in this case probably the house speaker and the president and their aides.

so that is the reality, you know, this is an opening gambit and probably not much more. let me just quickly put a button on this idea for filibusters with susan rice if i may, because i spoke to a very good democratic source, and i asked, if she is nominated could you overcome a filibuster, and the answer was yes, and this source said, if anybody wants to watch two old white guys, speaking, of course, of mccain and graham beat up on a black woman, i am selling tickets. it could get nasty. >> thanks. let me know you what think. follow me on twitter @andersoncooper. up next, why was the president in the dark about the petraeus sex scandal until after the election? the mistress of petraeus that led to the whole scandal. could she be prosecuted? that ahead. another keeping them honest report. why was president obama kept in the dark about cia director david petraeus' affair with paula broadwell until after the election?

i'm only in my 60's...

i've got a nice long life ahead. big plans. so when i found out medicare doesn't pay all my medical expenses, i got a medicare supplement insurance plan. [ male announcer ] if you're eligible for medicare, you may know it only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. call and find out about an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, it could save you thousands in out-of-pocket costs. call now to request your free decision guide. i've been with my doctor for 12 years. now i know i'll be able to stick with him. you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients. plus, there are no networks, and you never need a referral. see why millions of people

have already enrolled in the only medicare supplement insurance plans endorsed by aarp. don't wait. call now.

another "keeping them honest" report tonight. why was president obama kept in the dark about cia director david petraeus' affair with paula broadwell until after the presidential election. "the wall street journal" says attorney general eric holder knew in late summer of the affair. that information according to the white house was never passed until months later. consider this, the director of the cia was having an extramarital affair, communicating with his mistress via an unsecure e-mail account and potentially putting national security at risk. yet president obama was never

informed about it until months later. obama was asked about the investigation today during the news conference. >> i am withholding judgment with respect to how the entire process surrounding general petraeus came up. you know, we don't have all of the information yet. but i want to say that i have a lot of confidence generally in the fbi and they have a difficult job. and so i'm going to wait and see. >> the white house says there are protocols, that's the word they used, that must be followed when notifying the white house about criminal investigations. but keeping them honest, turns out there was a 2007 memo by then attorney general michael mukasey about notifying the white house and it states "the department will advise the white house about such criminal or civil enforcement matters only where it's important to the

performance of the president's duties and importance to from a law enforcement perspective," it goes on the say, "it is critically important to have frank and expeditious communications relating national security matters, including counterterrorism and counterespionage issues." yet the white house insists president obama didn't know of the affair until after the election. as for the investigation itself, we've got breaking news on that. we are joined by fran townsend, a member of the cia's external advisory board. she has the breaking news. fran, you've been talking to sources, what have you learned about possible legal fallout? >> it's interesting, anderson. what we understand is that paula broadwell had consented to the search of her homes, but after a discussion between her lawyers and the fbi, they decided to get a search warrant. we understand that they are reviewing documents, but based on what they've seen so far, they say that the classified material is, one, not

substantial that they have seen and, two, while it may be a technical violation, it's not egregious. as a result of that, the law enforcement official told me they don't expect that there will be a prosecution related to the unauthorized release of classified information, but that ultimately, that's not a decision that the fbi will make. they will make a presentation, they expect to wrap up in the next few days. they may want to do a final interview of paula broadwell, they will present what they have to the justice department and ultimately it's the justice department's decision whether or not to prosecute or issue a d k declinati declination. basically they'll decline to prosecute. that's where they think this will go now. >> all of the talk over the last few days over who may or may not have classified information. if it turns out that no laws were broken, then was all of this, the fbi resignation of petraeus basically just over some jealous e-mails? >> yeah, if you look at the time line of event, things that happened just the weeks before

the election, petraeus had met with the fbi, and it was obvious they knew about the affair, and he -- he then went to meet with his boss, the national director of intelligence, jim clapper, who i'm told with a heavy heart, advised director petraeus to go ahead and submit his letter of resignation. ultimately, not accused of any wrongdoing, not accused of giving out classified information. never a serious charge against him. so ultimately it was his decision to go ahead and offer his letter of resignation, and the letter that he issued to the employees at the cia the day he did it, he made very clear. i've made mistakes, i failed my family and i failed you. >> fran, i guess a lot of people are baffled that president obama didn't find out about the affair and possible security concerns until long after the justice department apparently did. now, the president didn't want to talk about it at the press conference today, but is there more clarity tonight about why he didn't know sooner? you point to a memo from the

justice department several years ago that might have insight. >> it's interesting, anderson. the law enforcement official that i was speaking to reminded me that the fbi director and his senior team, five mornings a week, briefed the attorney general, the deputy, and the assistant attorney general for the national security division on significant cases and the developments. they also discussed what ought to be briefed to the white house. this was one of those cases. a law enforcement official didn't know when, but it was, in fact, briefed to the attorney general with the presumption that that would then be passed onto the white house consistent with the memo that you read at the top of the segment. obviously, we don't know what happened. but under that memo, the right path would have been from the justice department, the attorney general or the deputy over to the white house counselor or the deputy there. clearly that didn't happen. when the president talks about the fbi has a protocol, from the fbi's perspective, they followed it, but clearly it didn't make its way all the way up to the president. >> still questions about why the investigation began, whether it was appropriate for the fbi to

even investigate this based on just the idea of harassing e-mails. if they were even that. fran townsend, appreciate it. suzanne kelly. there is new information in the finances of jill kelley and her husband scott, the florida couple caught up in the scandal. they started a cancer charity back in 2005, shortly after they moved to tampa, dissolved it a couple of years later and they are facing several lawsuits over money problems. drew griffin who is part of the cnn special investigation unit joins us with more on that what have you learned? >> another twisted part of the tale, anderson. public records show as jill kelley was entertaining top military brass in her backyard, she and her husband, dr. scott kelley, were battling a bank in court, because the bank claimed they weren't paying their mortgage. documents show the red brick house we've been showing on tampa's exclusive bay shore drive, purchased in 2004 for $1.5 million. four years later, regions bank files to foreclose on the kelleys, because the bank said they hadn't sent in a mortgage

payment since september 2009. records we've seen show that the kelpleys owe at least $250,000, probably more. and our search of florida records show there are at least nine other lawsuits involving money and the kelley family. >> a lot of lawsuits. what about the charity the couple began? >> it was called the dr. kelley cancer foundation. started in 2005. charity was formed according to the tax filings to "conduct research into efforts to discover ways to improve the quality of life of terminally ill cancer patients." sure sounded good. they filed a tax return in 2008 and what did it do? it raised $157,000 in contributions, spent the same amount on expenses. no record of cancer research. no record of care for patients

and a source told us that the matching amounts of the charity's first year are very unusual. the kelley charity spent $43,000, and $317,000 on meals and entertainment, and more than $8,000 on automobile expenses and dues and subscriptions of $6,700. they listed money spent on program services. we have no idea what it was, never explained and we have no idea how the charity raised $157,000 in the first place. it was dissolved in 2007, and dr. kelley cancer foundation never registered with the state of florida, but it retains the 501(c)3 status right now with the irs, anderson. >> it seems like every charity you look into, it's just -- it's amazing to me. any reaction on this from the kelleys? >> not really. we had a source close to the kelleys who said she didn't have enough information to respond. we reached out to the accounting firm that prepared the filing

documents. a representative there said they had nothing, nothing to say. >> wow, drew. appreciate it very much. we'll stay on it. thanks very much. president obama said millions americans didn't vote to him. gary tuchman takes us to a county where president obama only got five votes. why don't voters like him? we will find out more about that just ahead. a development in

a development in the murder of etan patz, the boy who vanished while walking to school in 1979. that is just ahead.

up close tonight, a corner of the country that by some measures the most anti-president obama place in the united states. at his press conference today, the president acknowledged he certainly didn't win over every voter. >> there are people across this country, millions of folks who worked so hard to get us elected, but also millions of people who may not have voted for us, but are also counting on us. and we take that responsibility very seriously. >> some of the people that president obama was talking about live in king county in texas. home to just about 255 people.

more than half of them are female, vast majority are white, and almost to a person, they don't much like president obama. here is gary tuchman. >> what do you think of barack obama's first term? >> he ain't worth a damn. no good at all. don't agree with anything he's done. >> reporter: it is a sentiment that was also common here during president obama's first run for president. here in rural king county texas, only 4.9% of voters chose obama in 2008. in 201, it's even lower, just 3.4%, the lowest for any county in the country. if you could tell barack obama to do one thing, what would you tell him? >> to resign. >> reporter: what advice would you give him for a second term? >> retire. >> reporter: king county is not only the home for barack obama's lowest vote percentage, it's also the county where he

received the lowest total number of votes. nationwide, the president tallied more than 62 million votes, but here in this county, he received 5 votes. that's right. just five votes. king county's population is small, but mitt romney winning 139-5 made this the president's worst showing in the u.s. we went to the girls basketball game at guthrie high school in the county seat to ask mitt romney supporters why there is such distaste with barack obama's presidency. >> i thought he sounded more like a dictator than a president. >> reporter: we went to the local baptist church to a monthly women's club meeting and heard similar sentiments. >> any time anything goes wrong, he just blames it on bush, you know, it's the last administration, not his fault. well, now it is his fault. >> reporter: in 2009, just after president obama was inaugurated, we spent time in king county, we met charlotte mccauley who told us -- >> i asked god that he would help him truly connect with him

so he would know what god's heart was for the united states of america. >> reporter: and this is charlotte today at the women's club meeting. you told us four years ago that you hoped that the lord would help barack obama. >> yes. >> do you think that happened? >> it doesn't ameer so. >> reporter: and then there's something we have heard before. what bothers you the most about the first term? >> not being honest about where he was born and different like things like that. to me, he just seems dishonest. >> reporter: he said he was born in hawaii, and he's kind of said that for a long time. i'm wondering if, "a," have you heard that? if you have, why don't you believe it? >> i just don't believe anything he says. >> reporter: there are certainly people in king county who don't believe the president about the country of his birth, and they also question his faith. president obama is a practicing christian, but here doubts persist. what do you think barack obama is? >> well, i think that he is a

muslim, but, you know -- and, of course, that affected my decision on whether to vote for him or not. >> reporter: back at the basketball game, it was notable that there were more people working in the concession stand than people in the county who voted for barack obama. we tried to find at least one of those five obama voters at the game, and we did, but all we can tell you is that the obama voter is, indeeed, somewhere in this wide crowd, and he did not feel comfortable tell you that he voted for the man who at least here is the most unpopular man. gary tuchman, cnn, guthrie, texas. >> interesting. ahead on "360," is the mideast about to explode? a top hamas leader was assassinated, and hamas says israel has opened the gates of hell. their words. anderson, seven countries took to the streets today to protest economic austerity

measures that are forcing steep budget cuts and tax hikes. protests in spain turned violent with 74 people injured and more than 100 arrested. a court appearance tomorrow for the man accused of murdering etan patz three decades ago. this happened three decades ago as etan was on his way to school when he was 6 years old. pedro hernandez was officially indicted. he was arrested over the summer and police say he confessed to the murder. federal transportation safety officials want to make a collision avoidance system standard on all vehicles just like seat bags and air bags. the system warns drivers about impending hazards, right now, optional on vehicles. and this rare total solar ellipse. it happens when the moon passes directly in front of the sun. blocking out its rays. australia will not see another one for nearly 400 years. >> wow, cool. great pictures. the military chief of hamas has been killed in one of the fiercest assaults on gaza in years.

the israeli defense forces posted video of the attack on youtube. armed groups are vowing to avenge the assassination. both sides fighting a twitter war. all that ahead.

♪ [ male announcer ] this is karen and jeremiah. they don't know it yet, but they're gonna fall in love, get married, have a couple of kids, [ children laughing ] move to the country, and live a long, happy life together where they almost never fight about money. [ dog barks ] because right after they get married, they'll find some retirement people who are paid on salary, not commission. they'll get straightforward guidance and be able to focus on other things, like each other, which isn't rocket science. it's just common sense.

from td ameritrade. if you like to video chat on skype, hold off until you hear our report. a security flaw that they had to fix today. that's ahead.

israel has launched a major air assault on gaza and leaving the door open to a possible ground assault as well. officials calling it a response to rocket attacks fired on gaza. we've seen this before. but this time the israeli defense forces is live blogging and tweeting the whole thing. this is an image that they tweeted announcing the death of hamas. ahmed jabari was shown in the video. the ivf posted this video jabari was riding in the car circled in yellow. he had been on israel's wanted list for years. s strike that killed him was one

of nearly three dozen attacks launched over eight hours according to hamas. now at least eight other palestinians died and dozen morse wounded. hamas has retaliated by firing more rockets into israel and firing back on twitter, warning that israel has "opened the gates of hell" on itself. egypt has recalled its ambassador to israel. in the meantime, the u.s. state department condemned the strikes fired from gaza and supporting israel's right to defend itself. i talked about all of this with sara sidner and also david kirkpatrick of "the new york times" and cnn's fareed zakaria. what is the latest on the attacks and the fallout? >> what we are seeing are more rockets coming into israel. there have been dozens of air strikes, as well since the killing of ahmed al jabarry, who is the leader of hamas' military wing, but he is also one of the founders of hamas. we are talking about a huge blow to hamas, and now the government there in gaza.

israel is also telling us, and we've just heard this from its military spokesperson, that they are bringing in reservists, but they are considering a ground war, but have not yet given the go-ahead for that, but they are preparing. we know that they have been firing with the air with the air strikes, but we also know that they have been firing from the sea. their ships are anchored just off of the sea there in gaza firing into gaza, and according to residents in gaza that we spoke to, at one point, it seemed to be raining bombs there in gaza. you can see some of the fires there. a big fallout. and there's real concern that there will be a full-scale war, something like you saw in 2008. >> the israeli military took to twitter saying we recommend that no hamas operatives whether low level or senior leaders show their faces above ground in the days ahead.

hamas has promised a harsh response, saying israel opened the gates of hell. do you think this is just the beginning of a new conflict? >> i think at this point it's very hard to know. i'm in cairo right now. what's striking from this point of view is that this is the moment that we have been waiting here for with the new democratically elected islamist government in cairo, we have been waiting for the moment would come when a crisis would come again with the government of egypt, and how will this government respond. this is a government of the muslim brotherhood. they are ideological kin with hamas, there has been support for hamas for years, but at the same time, they are now deeply invested in maintaining a climate of stability so they can get this country back on track and how egypt plays its cards will play a big role in what happens next door in gaza and the palestinian territories.

but if egyptians are telling hamas, we got the muslim brotherhood and egypt is telling hamas, we have to find a way out of this with some stability intact, that is a different outcome. >> fareed, how do you see this? >> i think there's no question it's justified. look, the attacks were out of hamas -- out of gaza by hamas, were completely -- they had gone crazy in terms of the scope, intensity, and hamas was openly taking credit for them, rather than disavowing them. the problem, netanyahu people, bibi and barak, they have a tactical approach. they are hitting back and remember, they have been trying to do this with israel and has invaded gaza and they have economically choked gaza, and they have succeeded. they have overwhelming force. what is the strategy to deal with gaza? how does this help israel in its long-term strategy? and how does it play out with the regional strategy where israel's relations with egypt have deteriorated, its relations with turkey have deteriorated,

so i think there's no question it is justified, but the question is whether it is smart. >> real concern about regional instability. >> there is a real concern about regional instability. if you don't have egyptian cooperation, ultimately you really can't control gaza. this undermines the palestinian authority and undermines the claim to u.n. -- the u.n. path, which netanyahu might like, it shows palestinians divided. >> we know that president obama spoke to the israeli prime minister. how big of a concern should this be, you think, for the u.s.? the last thing the u.s. is wanting is to get pulled into another war. but the administration has said obviously it has israel's back. >> i think that this is a major concern for the u.s., and like it or not, the u.s. is tied to israel in the minds of muslims around the world, and so, whatever happens in gaza, whatever happens in the palestinian territories is going to have repercussions in afghanistan, pakistan, the streets of egypt, and anywhere

where the u.s. is trying to build relationships and do business. >> fareed, obviously there are questions about the relationships between israel and turkey, which is another u.s. ally. >> it will be interesting to see how turkey reacts. the original schism between turkey and israel was over gaza and over the blockade of gaza. will prime minister erdogan of turkey use this as another opportunity to win domestic support at home by criticizing israel? >> sara, david and fareed, thank you. the story that shocked new york city. a nanny accused of killing two children, stabbed to death in the bathtub in the manhattan apartment. that nanny has been indicted, and the charges when we continue.

i'm susan hendricks with a "360" bulletin. according to reports, former gop presidential nominee mitt romney is blaming his loss on election day to president obama's so-called gifts to minorities and young voters. now, according to "the new york times," romney told donors at a conference call that president obama was "very generous in what they gave to those groups, policies that appealed to them." a grand jury has indicted new york nanny yoselyn ortega in the deaths of two children, ages 6 and 2. the children's mother found them stabbed to death in the bathroom and saw the nanny stab herself with a kitchen knife. ortega is in the hospital and under police watch. and skype is investigating a security flaw that let anyone

change a user's password to get control of the account. now, skype says they have fixed the flaw, but a small number of users may have been affected. anderson. >> susan, thanks. coming up, finally some solid evidence that one should always, always choose one's face tattoo very, very carefully. "the ridiculust" is next. ñ? [ male announcer ] this is steve.

he loves risk. but whether he's climbing everest, scuba diving the great barrier reef with sharks, or jumping into the market, he goes with people he trusts, which is why he trades with a company that doesn't nickel and dime him with hidden fees. so he can worry about other things, like what the market is doing and being ready, no matter what happens, which isn't rocket science. it's just common sense, from td ameritrade.

try capzasin-hp. it penetrates deep to block pain signals for hours of relief. capzasin-hp. take the pain out of arthritis.

time now for "the ridiculist," and tonight we have a story of a man in indiana standing up for his beliefs and facing controversy head-on and

not backing down when his critics say, dude, maybe getting that mitt romney tattoo on your face was not the greatest idea in your mind. meet eric hartsberg, forever known as the guy with the romney tattoo on his face. he got it before the election, but now after romney's defeat, he has no regrets that one side of his face is a permanent tribute to a losing campaign. >> i had it tattooed on because it was something i believed in. people say, you shed blood for the political party, and i would do it all over, and i know i did all i could for my candidate and my party. >> here is how it went up. eric put some of his face space up for bid on the internet and he asked people if they wanted to pay him to get a romney tattoo and the success of that idea, well, it's written all over his face. >> republican party candidate stepped up. he was like, hey, i'll give you

15 gs, we can do the side of the head. >> so as tattoos go, it is $15,000, yes. and how much were you paid to get your face tattooed? how much did you get for your face tattoo? nothing, right. of course not everyone eric has encountered is particularly charmed by said tattoo but have gotten concerned remarks. people or passersby. >> and if romney wins, i will get your face tattooed on my butt. >> and before you get too judgmental, not only does he have $15,000 he's parlaying it into stardom of some sorts. he is on the top ten of david letterman and on the top ten and even on "jimmy kimmel live." >> have you considered morphing your tattoo into a butterfly or anything like that? >> absolutely not. >> how long will you keep the tattoo? >> for the rest of my life. >> really?